Now here are the hard facts

As a member of the Freedom of Information for Children Programme, run by the World Federation of Advertisers, I would like to respond to the article “For the sake of adults, stop advertising to kids” MW May 16.

Sean Brierley clearly has not done his homework. The facts concerning advertising to children show that:

Children use advertising and are not used by it. Research conducted by Family Research Dynamics in 2001 showed that all six-year-olds surveyed understood that the purpose of advertising is to sell something, and that by eight years a critical attitude towards advertising was evident.

Advertising is only one of many influences in children’s lives. In 2000, a study was conducted by the Advertising Education Forum of nearly 5,000 parents in 15 EU countries. Advertising was found to be a moderate – not one of the top five – influence on children. Of those parents surveyed, more than 86 per cent of parents did not consider advertising as playing an important role in their children’s lives.

Consumers trust and value information provided by advertisers. The March 2002 study by the European Commission of more than 15,000 consumers across Europe demonstrated overwhelmingly that more than 74 per cent of European consumers regularly use advertising information to guide purchasing decisions.

Advertising is one of the most highly regulated industries. A wide variety of provisions exist to meet children’s needs. According to the Advertising Association, more than 150 laws regulate advertising in the UK. A wide variety of provisions in these laws exist to meet children’s special needs. In 2000, the ASA received 12,262 complaints, of which 50 related to advertising to children. Six of those complaints were upheld, which related to only four advertisements.

For those interested in the facts about advertising to children, more than 560 academic studies are openly available on the Advertising Education Forum’s website – aeforum.org.

If Brierley’s article were advertising, the ASA would demand its withdrawal because of the inaccuracies within it. If the article were a branded product, its flaws would cause it to be immediately taken off the market. Purchasers would get their money back.

Stephan Loerke

World Federation of Advertisers

Brussels

Latest from Marketing Week

NOT REGISTERED? IT'S FREE, QUICK AND EASY!

Access Marketing Week’s wealth of insight, analysis and opinion that will help you do your job better.

Register and receive the best content from the only UK title 100% dedicated to serving marketers' needs.

We’ll ask you just a few questions about what you do and where you work. The more we know about our visitors, the better and more relevant content we can provide for them. And, yes, knowing our audience better helps us find commercial partners too. Don't worry, we won't share your information with other parties, unless you give us permission to do so.

Register now

THE BEST CONTENT

Our award winning editorial team (PPA Digital Brand of the Year) ask the big questions about the biggest issues on everything from strategy through to execution to help you navigate the fast moving modern marketing landscape.

THE BIGGEST ISSUES

From the opportunities and challenges of emerging technology to the need for greater effectiveness, from the challenge of measurement to building a marketing team fit for the future, we are your guide.

PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Information, inspiration and advice from the marketing world and beyond that will help you develop as a marketer and as a leader.

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3711 or email subscriptions@marketingweek.com

If you are looking for our Jobs site, please click here